Randy Purcell v. Michael Biter

Filing 43

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Dean D. Pregerson for Report and Recommendation (Issued), #27 . Having made a de novo determination of the R&R, to which Petitioner fully objected, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that the Petition is denied, Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing is denied, and Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. (See Order for details) (bem)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
RANDY PURCELL,

14

) Case No. CV 12-8456-DDP (JPR)
)
)
) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND
) RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S.
) MAGISTRATE JUDGE
)
)
)
)

15

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the

10
Petitioner,

11
vs.

12
MICHAEL BITER, Warden,

13
Respondent.

16 Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of the
17 U.S. Magistrate Judge. On December 5, 2014, after receiving more
18 than a year’s worth of extensions of time, Petitioner filed
19 objections to the R&R, in which he rests “fully” on the arguments
20 in his Petition and Reply and briefly summarizes some of them.
21
Having made a de novo determination of the R&R, to which
22 Petitioner fully objected, the Court accepts the findings and
23 recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
24

IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that the Petition is denied,

25 Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary hearing is denied, and
26 Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.
27
28 DATED: March 24, 2015
DEAN D. PREGERSON
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE